I have no idea. Maybe. If there were such obvious crimes and he gave a computer full of the evidence to someone. None of it is about dick pictures though.
Absolutely... not at all important to the MAGA base. Totally focused on substantive crimes only. Spoiler
Will Hunter Go Full NRA? A Biden Indictment Could Bring a Surprising Challenge https://jonathanturley.org/2023/09/...ndictment-could-bring-a-surprising-challenge/ excerpt: . . . this would not be the first time that Hunter followed a path that his father has previously condemned in others. For example, for decades, Joe Biden has railed against “deadbeat dads” despite his son’s long effort to avoid paying child support to Lunden Alexis Roberts. Hunter spent years fighting support for his daughter Navy, even after a court confirmed that he was her father. Joe Biden himself only recently acknowledged the existence of Navy after routinely excluding her from the list of his grandchildren. Yet, the President may not be quite ready for his son to join actual hunters in advocating for sweeping gun rights protections, including for drug users. In making the argument, Hunter will have to claim that references to gun ownership by “law-abiding citizens” in past cases like District of Columbia v. Heller and Bruen should not be read to exclude everyone who breaks the law. Judge Smith cites a prior ruling in United States v. Rahimi, rejecting the federal ban on gun possession by people subject to domestic violence restraining orders. In that decision, the court held that the phrase should be read as “shorthand” alluding to “people who were historically ‘stripped of their Second Amendment rights.'” The government has argued (and would likely argue in the Biden case) that there were laws from the 17th and 18th centuries barring people from publicly carrying or firing guns while intoxicated. However, the Fifth Circuit rejected the historical claim and noted that “under the government’s reasoning, Congress could ban gun possession by anyone who has multiple alcoholic drinks a week…based on the postbellum intoxicated carry laws. The analogical reasoning Bruen prescribed cannot stretch that far.” The government has tried to use other laws barring guns to the mentally ill and dangerous individuals as historical analogs, but the court would have none of it. Indeed, Hunter could find himself arguing that people are too often denied rights by the government under claims that they are “insurrectionists.” Sound familiar? The government has pointed to how “Founding-era governments took guns away from persons perceived to be dangerous.” However, the Fifth Circuit noted that those laws targeted unpopular people, including Catholics, as akin to traitors to the Revolution. Judge Smith wrote that drug users “are not a class of political traitors, as British Loyalists were perceived to be. Nor are they like Catholics and other religious dissenters who were seen as potential insurrectionists.” So, a rejection of the gun diversion agreement could prove an even greater diversion for the Biden family as Hunter embraces the very decisions and rights long opposed by his father. In the meantime, the Justice Department would be citing historical precedent used against Catholics (like the Bidens) as potential insurrectionists who cannot be trusted with weapons. more at the link
I don't consider MTG and her ilk serious actors, nor do I care what they say or do. I am talking about actual investigations.
Please enlighten me on which Republican on the House committee investigating Hunter Biden qualifies as a “serious actor”.
Can't say I have followed their careers all that closely. Maybe Virginia Foxx or Nancy Mace. Anna Paulina Luna is the hottest one.
Sounds like you are taking them oh so serious when the one and only positive comment you make about them is their looks lol. Regardless Gym Jordan and James Comer run the committee. Do those two strike you as serious lawmakers only interested in serving the American people? It’s like saying the Rockets are going to be a contending basketball team this year because they drafted Cam Whitmore when it’s Dillon Brooks who will have the ball in his hands in the end of games.
Who said I was taking Anna Paulina Luna seriously? I don't think anyone from one of the two major parties is a serious lawmaker interested only in serving the American people. If they were, they would be getting rid of most of government.
Hunter Biden claims he was ‘embarrassed’ by laptop in deposition — but still denies it or contents are his https://nypost.com/2023/09/07/hunter-biden-says-he-was-embarrassed-by-laptop-in-deposition/
I guess that explains your nihilistic view of our democracy and why you preach the need to blow it up and allow for consolidated power in an autocratic figure. I actually do think there are a few well meaning Republicans and many well meaning democrats. I don’t believe in your libertarian fantasy that we all know is just a cover for autocracy. Without expanded representation and without checks and balances you are always going to end up with autocracy.
Yes. Wait, what? How does less centralized government power lead to consolidated power in an autocratic figure? So a less powerful, smaller government is going to have more control over our lives?
Yup. More consolidation absolutely leads to more power at the top. This is exactly what the right is openly trying to promote: https://apnews.com/article/election...ump-heritage-857eb794e505f1c6710eb03fd5b58981 Dismantling the "Administrative State" will absolutory have consequences. Even with the purest Libertarian intentions, you are still going to organically create an Oligarchy where private industry takes over in absence of government for many of the expanded services, but in the end they still have a government to answer to. Without extended branches of government kept away from political process, you have only self interested political people regulating private industry. Geez, what could go wrong? The plan in which I linked to might not be exactly the Libertarian fantasy in your dreams, but it's more of less where we'd ultimately end up anyways. Corruption, and ultimately more consolidated power to one man.
I think we can all agree with your obsession with Hunter Biden and the need for justice. I'm sure glad Hunter Biden isn't running for president. We sure wouldn't want someone with so much legal baggage as a candidate, would we?
LOL. MAGA folks need a few 18 wheelers to haul off all Trump's baggage. Yet, he's their favorite Presidential candidate.
FU$K... okay THATS IT!!! I am NOT voting for Hunter Biden anymore!!! Now I think I'll vote for Trump instead.
I guess my confusion comes from how you get from less government control of private entities, to somehow the government maintains the same control, except worse. At least the people who say that corporations will just wield unlimited power against people make sense. They deny agency to the masses, and assume the people will just accept exploitation, but they have some foundational concepts.
